Re: [ROFL] GCC's GPLv3 "Updated License Exception"

[Rjack]

7 wrote:
> Rjack wrote:
>
> > 7 wrote:
> >
> > > As I write the assembler code for how a switch statement is implemented,
> > > then I have copyright over it no matter how it gets subsequently used.
> > > The assembler code for the switch statement is not generated
> > > 'automatically'. The exact sequence is something I have to creatively
> > > interpret and put together reading CPU specification.
> > Nonsense.
> >
> > The structural semantics of a "switch" statement are dictated by the
> > programming language specification. The the implementation of that
> > structure is dictated by the CPU specification.
>
> Wrong fool. You don't know any assembler coding.
>
> > So what's so original about that?
>
> If you knew assembler you wouldn't ask.

I was probably writing assembler when you were a glint in your 
Daddy's eye.

Sincerely,
Rjack :)